I hear you, Pawno. Raiders did have a shot at Alex, probably a good one, because his family lives in the Bay.

I don't think Pryor will begin the season as a starter, the only way I see him getting some playtime is either Flynn stinks it up completely, or he gets injured. And picks involved in trades say enough about who is better QB (Alex vs Matt). I'm gonna say it though, Alex has a better arm than Flynn.

Why would you want to see your new HC and GM gone? You finally have someone who is starting to build a team as it should be done. I like DHB, and I think he could be kept, but that's it. Other than that, they dealt away all of the players that had big contracts, and weren't living up to them.

Yeah, except Alex Smith isn't a guy you can rely on to make you a winning franchise. We'd suck a lot with Smith. I'd take the probably shitty unknown commodity on the off chance he is real good than settle for the definition of mediocrity.

But that is just your opinion, not a fact. Mediocrity stuff. Alex proved that he can win with a decent players around him. You can hate him, dislike him, or whatever it is, it still doesn't change a fact that guy can play in a SB, and win for a team.

Unknown commodities, this year's drafties, seem to be known to coaches and GMs around the league, cause pretty much all of the teams with QB needs are deciding to settle with mediocrity rather than relying on the likes of Geno, Barkley, E.J....etc.

Alex Smith is in the range of the 14-18th best QB's. That's mediocrity. Obviously you have to scout and if you don't see anything you like you can't settle for mediocrity. Flynn could bust very easily on the Raiders, but there is film to suggest he potentially has higher upside than Smith.

I don't think Flynn will be very good, but we are going to suck next year and sucking with Smith is a bad idea all things considered.

Obviously Smith right now is the choice if you want to win right now, but we aren't going to win right now and I will take the unknown commodity.

Chiefs feel they have a roster to compete this year and they felt that last year. It's also why they brought in a veteran coach. It's why they chose Smith. If they felt they didn't have the talent to complete they'd probably risk it with a young QB this year or someone that could be very good.

His play from the last two years, and stats, suggest that you are ranking him lower than he really is, and then you base everything else on that. So, once again, I understand you don't like him, but that doesn't change the fact that you are undervaluing him. I mean, there is a film on Flynn that shows he might be better than Alex. Really now? And Alex's games, which were far better recently than that small amount of film Flynn has, are putting him in mediocrity group?

And then you contradict yourself by saying that Chiefs are in a win now mode so they traded for him, when earlier you said you can't win with him.

I agree that Flynn was better choice for the Raiders, because of the rebuilding.

I'm well aware of the fact that Alex could play worse than last two years, with the new team, but he proved he can win, and play good football. While Flynn didn't do damn thing, and you are seeing more potential in a guy who never was a starter. That's just dissing Alex for no valid reason, aside the fact that you like different type of QBs. Which is fine, but that doesn't make him bad in the range you've put him in. Guy played at top 3 last year prior to injury, and you are saying he might be at number 18 based on what exactly?

We'll just have to wait and see...I'm aware that he might regress and I don't guarantee success, but there is nothing, in his last two to three years play,that can make you guarantee that he will be mediocre, let alone not win for you. And you are basing it off like those are somehow facts.

I think I am potentially overranking Smith. Stats that I use have him as the 23rd best QB at putting up points. I bumped him up through eye test and because the niners were top eight in offense last year with him at center.

I also didn't contradict anything. I don't think the Chiefs will win with him, but obviously, they think they will win with him.

The reason his traditional stats are great because out of all 39 QB's who qualified he was 39th in deep throw percentage while having the eleventh best protection and a top three running game. He took the least amount of risk on every throw. It's why he had that incredible streak of not throwing any interceptions. Which is fine, he won't lose you a game that way. And I think he will only adjust and put up similar mediocre numbers in Reed's system if Reed adjusts for the fact Smith is the definition of a captain check down.

But, I believe if he put up those same exact stats and the team was losing for whatever reasons, I don't think people would be giving him any credit for his improved stats and I'd probably argue he did improve.

I think he gets too much credit for a team that was elite out almost every position in the game. I'd even argue at the time he may have been the weak link on the Niners. Every team would kill to have any player on the Niners.

Well then, I must say those are some really flawed stats you are using, that are helping you see things the way you like them.

Yeah, but you did say you would be pissed if he was traded to Raiders, inclining that they would win more games with him than Flynn. Or at least that's how it sounded.

Kaep had the same exact team, but nobody is saying his stats are great because of the team. Why? Because of the deep ball? Why is that so important to some people? If the guy, who supposedly is not throwing deep balls, is averaging 8 yards per pass attempt, why, in the name of god, would he risk it? How many QBs do you know who can have that percentage of completed passes, and that amount of yards per attempt...and all that without throwing the deep ball? That should speak volumes, but I don't know...I guess stats don't make people think how can that be possible, they see that he is 39th at deep ball percentage, and somehow success in other part of the game becomes irrelevant. And a guy who the season before last had a second place in 4th quarter comebacks is more than a guy who "won't lose you games". Still, everyone is gonna neglect that. And, in my book, and I think in coaches books, that counts. I still fail to realize what is it besides that deep ball that you don't like about him. He was putting up points, when it comes to passing, he was doing it more than Kaep, and Kaep ran more, but those stats are not the passing ones. So, when you look at him as a passer, 3:1 TD to INT ratio is damn good.

Also, have you seen the difference in points per game allowed by 49ers D with Alex and with Kaep? No matter which stats you look at, Alex is making the team he plays for better. His intellect and decision making is great, so he is, as WCO should be used, keeping the ball as much as possible in possession of the offense, so defense doesn't have to spend all day on the field, and also keeping opponents' score low. Those are the things that make you a winner, mistake free football, and keeping the ball in your control. Those are the things that Alex does well.

Pawno is gonna get pissed again, cause one way or another we all end up discussing this subject. But I don't realize how you can take away all of the credit from a player who played great football the last two seasons at least. I understand that you think he will be worse this year, that's something that is somewhat valid to expect, new team, coaches, team is weaker...etc. You can say that he sucked all of his career before Harbs (which isn't entirely true, but hold some value if you don't go into deep analysis). I just don't get how you can see him as a 23rd best QB in the league. I'm positive that by those stats you use Fitzpatrick would be better, and he just got cut, and probably won't start, and he didn't draw much of attention.

Give credit where the credit is due. Nothing more, nothing less. You are just putting down things like records in number of INTs, passes without being intercepted...like he did all of that by checking down, and not managing to win games while doing that, while putting 8 yards per attempt. There are more ways than just airing it out, to be a good QB.

Damn, that's too much writing. I'm not gonna add more to this subject until season begins. Maybe we can put a sig bet, or something for the upcoming season, cause obviously, you will never say that Alex played good football the last 2 years. Say, for instance, pass rating, or number of wins KC will have with him at helm?

I am explaining why he has great completion percentage. He still puts up less points than other QB's. It's why the Niners had a better point differential with Kaep. It's okay to be a manager and that's what he was, but he was supported by an elite cast and that makes him appear better than he is. I put him as 14-18th best QB. The reason Smith is so low in these stats are because it is giving a **** of ton credit to the Oline, running game, and the WR play.

Advanced stats are behind in football so I tend to mix in player stats with a teams offensive efficiency. The Niners were eight in offensive efficiency and I bumped Alex Smith up on my list for it. But I am not convinced that Jason Campbell, Matt Moore, or other average QB's would do any worse than Smith in the Niners system. It was very QB friendly and the play calling was brilliant. Hell, I am sure people would be saying similar things about those two I mentioned in the Niners system. Giving Smith a lot of credit, to me, takes away a lot of where the credit actually deserves to go, like Harbaugh, the Oline, Gore, Davis, and even Crabtree/Manningham last year.

QB's I take over Smith without thinking about itRodgersBradyPeytonBreesRyanRomoBig BenEliMatthew StaffordCam Newton ShaubKaepWilsonCutlerRivers

I think it makes a lot of sense that Smith in the category below all the guys I just listed. I am not sure you can reasonably make the argument smith is better than of those guys.

I'd be interested in a sig bet, but we have to agree on how we are going to evaluate Smith for this sig bet.

I'm not taking anything away from OL, or WRs. WRs weren't great, aside from Crabtree's good season, Manningham had some good catches, but then he got injured.

The 49ers had a slightly more points with Kaep, and they were conceding a lot more. I'll try to look for the exact stats for that.

Playcalling wasn't that great as it appears. Once 49ers were in the lead, on quite a few of the occassions they decided to pound the rock, by just running the ball, or throwing short passed and hoping WRs can do something. Because of that some teams stayed in games for a lot more than they should have. And the numbers were lower for all the players on offense.With Kaep they played a bit differently, but in my opinion it is because they had to catch up, because they started losing early on. If it was the case with Alex, I think they would ask him to throw more as well.

Overall, when you look the whole career, yeah, most of those guys are better than Alex, if not all. But lately, some of them were bad. Heck, Rivers sucked ass big time, Cutler is average, Schaub is regressing, and is probably a choker, Big Ben is not what he used to be, Stafford is a moron who always does something stupid at the least needed moment, Romo is a definition of a choker...etc. So, lately (cause everyone says this is "what have you done lately league") Alex is better than some of those guys. I don't know what future brings, quite possibly he will be worse than last two years, and some of those guys will bounce back...but, it could end up showing that Alex can play ball, and that those guys had a luck of being surrounded with good players, like Alex was this last season, (and somehow that's a reason he is bad, cause he had good teammates). Take away good players from good QBs, and you will get what youdid out of Rivers, Cutler...etc. Give them back weapons, and suddenly all is good. Alex is the only player that will be criticized for winning with good team around him, and for others it is a normal thing to have good weapons (and no one will say that Alex sucked prior because of the lack of those same weapons).

We shall have to see...I'm really interested after all these changes at QB position around the league, who will end up playing good and lifting the team's overall play.

Yeah, it would be hard to agree on evaluation thing, cause of the different way we look at things. Do you have any suggestion? Maybe number of wins for KC could be easier thing to do.

Well, all the guys I listed still put up better numbers than Smith except for Cutler. Cutler actually did worse than Smith.

And close games with in one possession are 49-51. I don't really believe any of these guys are choker because almost everyone with a large sample size has almost exactly the same winning percentage in close games.

I don't criticize Smith for winning with a good team, it feels like that because I feel like he is overrated because he wins with a good team. If the Niners were losing and he put up similar numbers I'd say he is better than people are saying. I ignore team success completely when evaluating players. Football has a 53 man roster, it's the ultimate team sport. I am not going to knock someone in a ranking for his teams deficiencies.

I like the move, he is a sure tackler and is an absolute ballhawk. Probably wont see a whole lot of lay from him mat cornerback but QBs will think twice throwing & WRs will think twice about going up in the middle with no24 back there.

Reggie McKenzie is growing on me. Still think we need to get rid of this coach though.